View Full Version : Obama/Biden
The jackasses have provided a target-rich-environment. Unfortunately, the heffalumps are piss-poor shooters.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92NQBTO0&show_article=1
Pat
GratefulCitizen
08-23-2008, 00:31
Panicked acolytes cry out to their captain:
"captain obama, we're sinking in the polls and listing to port!"
The captain responds:
"We need more weight on the port side!"
Unbelievable.
It seems as if they're actively trying to lose.
:munchin:D:munchin
It seems as if they're actively trying to lose.
May they succeed in their plan. :D
It would be great to see Obama go down in defeat.
The Reaper
08-23-2008, 06:32
This is a good thing for a variety of reasons, IMHO.
TR
Red Flag 1
08-23-2008, 08:03
This is a good thing for a variety of reasons, IMHO.
TR
Biden as VP calls to mind Nixon's attack dog Spiro T Agnew.
RF 1
rubberneck
08-23-2008, 08:47
Joe Biden will step on his crank big time at some point over the next 3 months. He can't avoid it. His mouth has always been five steps ahead of his brain. All we need now is for McCain to not screw up his pick.
Roguish Lawyer
08-23-2008, 10:29
I don't understand you guys -- aren't you concerned about Biden delivering those key electoral votes from Delaware? :D;)
Biden is the wrong pick for several reasons. The first and most important being that Obama walked right into the McCain trap. McCain has been hammering on his lack of experience especially in regards to foreign policy. So instead of sticking to his campaign slogan of "change" Obama instead chooses someone of McCain's choosing, not his own. If he was really the candidate of change he would have chosen Hagel, Sieblus, Kaine or Bayh. Instead he allowed McCain's rhetoric to make his choice for him
Second, Joe Biden with all of his experience, has a great big mouth. You can be guaranteed that he will say quite a few things between now and the General election that is going to cause Obama to have to pry his foot out of his mouth with a crowbar.
Third, Biden is on record stating that Obama is in no way ready to be POTUS. Sure it may just be the typical primary BS, but you can be sure McCain won't be picking Romney, for this reason, as well as many others.
Fourth - Biden is on record saying he would be honored if asked by McCain to be his running mate, and would do it.
Obama is going to have to go through the next few weeks with his own running mate the central figure in McCain's ads.
Obama just showed how truly inexperienced he is, and needs to get a few more years under his belt.
I also believe this supports my thoughts that McCain is going to choose Lieberman as his running mate. He is going to hit Obama on the fact that he really isn't the "change" candidate because he picked someone that has been aroung washington for too long. If McCain wants to cement his "maverick" status, he will do as he has done in the past, working in a bi-partisan manner, and reach across the aisle for his running mate. He has already laid the groundwork for having a Pro-choice VP. I think the far right conservatives are scared enough of Obama, and now Biden, that they won't stay home, and are going to vote for McCain regardless.
Hillary's supporters can now ensure a McCain win, justifying their vote saying they weren't voting for McCain they were voting for Lieberman. A McCain victory will ensure Hillary can run again in 2012. Waiting for 2016 is too much of a long shot.
I have been thinking Liberman for a long time, we will know soon enough.
I have been thinking Liberman for a long time, we will know soon enough.
I have three bets going with my husband. The first I won when Obama picked Biden, he thought he would pick Hillary.
The second is Hillary will walk out of the DNC as the Democratic Nominee for POTUS. My husband thinks I am nuts on this one
The Third is that McCain will pick Lieberman. The husband is starting to see my line of thinking on this one and is slowly trying to get out of this bet.
Kyobanim
08-23-2008, 11:11
Afchic,
I posted a couple of your comments on a msnbc board re; the choice.
I love stirring that shit pot.
btw, I wouldn't vote against you on any of your comments.
charlietwo
08-23-2008, 11:17
I have three bets going with my husband. The first I won when Obama picked Biden, he thought he would pick Hillary.
The second is Hillary will walk out of the DNC as the Democratic Nominee for POTUS. My husband thinks I am nuts on this one
The Third is that McCain will pick Lieberman. The husband is starting to see my line of thinking on this one and is slowly trying to get out of this bet.
The DNC would be wise to pick Hillary at this point... she's the only one who could beat McCain with all the foul-ups that Obama has been making lately. He's a sinking ship, and the rats will be fleeing.
Afchic,
I posted a couple of your comments on a msnbc board re; the choice.
I love stirring that shit pot.
btw, I wouldn't vote against you on any of your comments.
I am right there with you. I have been on the MSNBC US News message board all morning. If you ever get a chance go check in, it is pretty damn funny to read how some of these people justify their thoughts, and thought processes.
Goggles Pizano
08-23-2008, 11:35
As a resident of this Liberal land Joey B calls home I can say this with all the sincerity I can muster: BWAAAHAAAHAAHAAA!
I think McCain can now pick Tim Pawlenty. With that choice (and the Biden choice by B-ho)McCain will have bought himself three quarters of the Hillary backers. They are pissed off and will make as much of a scene as possible inside, and out of that convention center. I also think Shrillary and Caligula are planning a delegate uprising. I just cannot see Bill sitting on this without opening his big mouth! That convention is about to get UGLY!
Joe Biden will step on his crank big time at some point over the next 3 months. He can't avoid it.
LOL...oh he's way ahead of you there... ;) :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDVUPqoowf8&eurl=http://www.shadowspear.com/vb/showthread.php?t=14155&page=2
rubberneck
08-23-2008, 11:59
The Third is that McCain will pick Lieberman. The husband is starting to see my line of thinking on this one and is slowly trying to get out of this bet.
That would be political suicide. There is no upside to picking Lieberman. Those who have supported Lieberman for years won't suddenly turn their backs on the DNC. It will however cost McCain dearly with conservatives.
GratefulCitizen
08-23-2008, 12:05
From a Drudge link: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/08/the_case_against_joe_biden.html
Joe Loves Joe
One of the most overlooked episodes during the 1987 collapse of Biden's campaign was a snippet of footage captured by C-Span in which the Delaware senator, in response to a question about where he went to law school and what sort of grades he received, delivered this classic line: "I think I have a much higher IQ than you do."
While any human being -- especially a candidate for president who is constantly being poked and prodded -- can be forgiven a momentary flash of temper, Biden's detractors point to that incident as evidence that the senator thinks he is the bee's knees and doesn't care who knows it.
...and to think that they passed on John Edwards...
...too much of a narcissist...
:munchin
Jack Moroney (RIP)
08-23-2008, 12:37
Joe Biden will step on his crank big time at some point over the next 3 months. .
Well when he does, and he will, let's hope he is wearing golf shoes so everyone gets caught in the spray-including Barry O who will not look so "neat and clean" and will have a major problem being "articulate" when he comes to Biden's rescue. Does anyone else sense a "gunfight" in Denver:D
Obama just showed how truly inexperienced he is, and needs to get a few more years under his belt.
Hillary's supporters can now ensure a McCain win, justifying their vote saying they weren't voting for McCain they were voting for Lieberman. A McCain victory will ensure Hillary can run again in 2012. Waiting for 2016 is too much of a long shot.I've said this before....Obama should've let Hillary have the nomination and ran in 2012. Now he's screwed!:lifter
Stay safe.
I have three bets going with my husband. The first I won when Obama picked Biden, he thought he would pick Hillary.
The second is Hillary will walk out of the DNC as the Democratic Nominee for POTUS. My husband thinks I am nuts on this one
The Third is that McCain will pick Lieberman. The husband is starting to see my line of thinking on this one and is slowly trying to get out of this bet.
afchic,
Some similar thoughts have been rolling around in my head on this as well.
Here is to hoping...
Holly
(btw...glad you got the avatar workin'! I like it!:lifter)
LongTabSigO
08-24-2008, 10:56
I have three bets going with my husband. The first I won when Obama picked Biden, he thought he would pick Hillary.
The second is Hillary will walk out of the DNC as the Democratic Nominee for POTUS. My husband thinks I am nuts on this one
The Third is that McCain will pick Lieberman. The husband is starting to see my line of thinking on this one and is slowly trying to get out of this bet.
We agreed on the first.
I'm of the same mind as you vis a vis Hillary. And, to up the ante, the impetus behind this will center around the "missing" Obama birth certificate.
Third, nah...i don't think McCain will make that move. Leaving aside the whole "He's a Dem" thing, it's not like Lieberman did much for Kerry's bid last time.
We agreed on the first.
I'm of the same mind as you vis a vis Hillary. And, to up the ante, the impetus behind this will center around the "missing" Obama birth certificate.
Third, nah...i don't think McCain will make that move. Leaving aside the whole "He's a Dem" thing, it's not like Lieberman did much for Kerry's bid last time.
As for the birth certificate thing, all I hear people saying in the media is that the one on his website is a valid birth certificate that proves he was born here in the states. When my husband adopted my daughter, she was issued a new birth certificate with his name on it. Just as valid as the one she had without her biological father's name on it. My point is that if he has nothing to hide, release the original birth certificate. To me this amounts to Kerry refusing to release his original DD 214 during the 2004 election. If you have nothing to hide, provide the proof.
Another interesting thing about Obama came to light yesterday that no one is talking about. I saw an article from a little paper in Chicago about it and they were the only ones addressing the issue. The University where Obama and Ayers worked together on some kind of research has finally agreed to release all the research materials that have been in storage. It took someone filing a FOIA lawsuit I believe, to get it released. It will be released tomorrow. Let's see if that gets any coverage. It should be interesting to see what is in it, since Obama has been working so hard to ensure it never saw the light of day.
As for Lieberman, he didn't do a lot of John Kerry because they were both dems. Reaching across the aisle for his VP would certainly cement McCain's maverick status. I personally don't think it is political suicide. I know a lot of conservatives that really like him. JMO
LongTabSigO
08-25-2008, 18:27
As for the birth certificate thing, all I hear people saying in the media is that the one on his website is a valid birth certificate that proves he was born here in the states. When my husband adopted my daughter, she was issued a new birth certificate with his name on it. Just as valid as the one she had without her biological father's name on it. My point is that if he has nothing to hide, release the original birth certificate. To me this amounts to Kerry refusing to release his original DD 214 during the 2004 election. If you have nothing to hide, provide the proof.
I think we agree here. The issue isn't "Is Obama a Citizen". The question is "Is Obama a NATURAL BORN citizen?"
It's a mess.
I thought BHO was about "change", how long has Biden been around washington?? Not to much "change" there. and they're bashing McCain for being around awhile, I guess it suites their agenda.
greenberetTFS
08-26-2008, 11:23
Joe Bidens on record stating McCain would be an excellent pick as VP for Kerry last election...:confused: Biden is on record saying he would be honored if asked by McCain to be his running mate, and would do it.....How will he respond to the media regarding these statements ? :boohoo
GB TFS :munchin
Now that the Senator with the furthest left voting record in the Senate and the Senator with the third furthest left voting are the Democrats' nominees for President and Vice President, there will be great expressions of indignation over being "negative" if anyone dares call them "liberals." Actually, leftists would be more accurate.
The reason so many people misunderstand so many issues is not that these issues are so complex, but that people do not want a factual or analytical explanation that leaves them emotionally unsatisfied. They want villains to hate and heroes to cheer-- and they don't want explanations that do not give them that.
At one time, it was said "The truth will make you free." Today, there seem to be those who think that rhetoric and hype will make you free. It might even be called the audacity of hype.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
It’s been reported that Senator Biden’s net worth is approximately $100,000-$150,000. It’s a little difficult to comprehend that someone who has been a senator since 1972, 36 years, and who has received an annual salary ranging from $42,000(1972) to $169,300 in 2008 hasn’t obtain more wealth. In addition to his salary, he receives perquisites which are listed below. Lastly, he is married to Dr. Jill Biden, the former Jill Jacobs, an educator in Delaware's schools for over twenty years. She currently is a professor teaching at Delaware Technical Community College.
Expense Allowances for members, kept separate from personal staff allowances, cover domestic travel, stationery, newsletters, overseas postage, telephone and telegraph service, and other expenses in Washington and in the members' state or congressional districts.
Foreign Travel by members for the conduct of government business is financed through special allowances. These funds can come from various sources.
Outside Employment Income is generally limited to 15% of member pay. There are, however, certain prohibited categories: Members may not receive compensation for employment in real estate, insurance sales, the practice of law, the practice of medicine, or service as an officer or board member.
Domestic Travel (to and from District/State) House: Included in office expenses is a minimum amount of $9,700 (2003), with additional funding based on a formula that uses the distance from Washington, DC to the farthest point in the Congressional district from Washington
http://www.thecapitol.net/FAQ/payandperqs.htm
It’s been reported that Senator Biden’s net worth is approximately $100,000-$150,000.
In 2006, OpenSecrets.org, rated his net worth as 108th in the Senate. I guess 8 Senate Pages earned more than he did. :D
Pat
ZonieDiver
08-26-2008, 21:30
It’s been reported that Senator Biden’s net worth is approximately $100,000-$150,000. It’s a little difficult to comprehend that someone who has been a senator since 1972, 38 years, and who has received an annual salary ranging from $42,000(1972) to $169,300 in 2008 hasn’t obtain more wealth. In addition to his salary, he receives perquisites which are listed below. Lastly, he is married to Dr. Jill Biden, the former Jill Jacobs, an educator in Delaware's schools for over twenty years. She currently is a professor teaching at Delaware Technical Community College.
Expense Allowances for members, kept separate from personal staff allowances, cover domestic travel, stationery, newsletters, overseas postage, telephone and telegraph service, and other expenses in Washington and in the members' state or congressional districts.
Foreign Travel by members for the conduct of government business is financed through special allowances. These funds can come from various sources.
Outside Employment Income is generally limited to 15% of member pay. There are, however, certain prohibited categories: Members may not receive compensation for employment in real estate, insurance sales, the practice of law, the practice of medicine, or service as an officer or board member.
Domestic Travel (to and from District/State) House: Included in office expenses is a minimum amount of $9,700 (2003), with additional funding based on a formula that uses the distance from Washington, DC to the farthest point in the Congressional district from Washington
http://www.thecapitol.net/FAQ/payandperqs.htm
Those hair transplants must be more expensive than I thought!
Defender968
09-18-2008, 10:27
Joe Biden will step on his crank big time at some point over the next 3 months. He can't avoid it. His mouth has always been five steps ahead of his brain. All we need now is for McCain to not screw up his pick.
You called that one!
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/biden-wealthy-americans-must-pay-more-taxes-to-show-patriotism/
Biden: Wealthy Americans Must Pay More Taxes to Show Patriotism
WASHINGTON — Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden said Thursday that paying more in taxes is the patriotic thing to do for wealthier Americans. In a new TV ad that repeats widely debunked claims about the Democratic tax plan, the Republican campaign calls Obama’s tax increases “painful.”
Under the economic plan proposed by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, people earning more than $250,000 a year would pay more in taxes while those earning less — the vast majority of American taxpayers — would receive a tax cut.
Although Republican John McCain claims that Obama would raise taxes, the independent Tax Policy Center and other groups conclude that four out of five U.S. households would receive tax cuts under Obama’s proposals.
“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Biden said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”
McCain released a television ad Thursday charging that Obama would increase the size of the federal government amid an economic crisis. Contending that “a big government casts a big shadow on us all,” the ad features the image of a shadow slowly covering a sleeping baby as a narrator misstates the reach of the Obama tax proposal.
“Obama and his liberal congressional allies want a massive government, billions in spending increases, wasteful pork,” the ad says. “And we would pay — painful income taxes, skyrocketing taxes on life savings, electricity and home heating oil. Can your family afford that?”
Here's a good example of good ole Joe stepping on his crank again... hey Joe that's not patriotism, that's called socialism and it doesn't work no matter what you and BHO call it..... economic justice or whatever!
The Reaper
09-18-2008, 10:34
Pretty heavily spun article.
Fails to mention the "Robin Hood" attempt as well. Take more from those few who have earned income and pay taxes, and give it to a larger group of people (read voters) who do not work and who pay no taxes.
TR
longrange1947
09-18-2008, 11:42
Have you guys seen the dust up over his comments about his wife being killed by a truck driver that drank his lunch and the truck driver's daughter?
Seems that the truck driver was not intoxicated and the police report and news paper accounts says just that.
Could Biden be doing a Hillary with drunken snipers? :munchin
ZonieDiver
09-18-2008, 13:01
Quote: Although Republican John McCain claims that Obama would raise taxes, the independent Tax Policy Center and other groups conclude that four out of five U.S. households would receive tax cuts under Obama’s proposals.
“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Biden said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.” End Quote
Granting that I am looking at 2005 Census data and that the numbers may have shifted upward since then (until recently!), but if the lower 80% of incomes in the US are going to get a "tax cut" (and we are ONLY talking income taxes here), that would mean that the upper 20% are going to see their taxes increase. "Soak the rich!" But - by the 2005 data, who is "rich"? To be included in that august grouping, in 2005, your household income would have been $87,500. and up! That is "household income" and not "personal income"!
Two teachers working and making about 45k+ would be in the "soak the rich" category! I don't think the average American really looks at the numbers, and BHO-JB sure aren't saying! The number I keep hearing them say is "$250k and up - which would only amount to the top 1.5% of household income. I think "we'd" have to confiscate it all!
".....the independent Tax Policy Center and other groups conclude that four out of five U.S. households would receive tax cuts under Obama’s proposals...."
People must first realize what a "tax cut" is to Obama and other libs. If you have no federal tax bill for the year the libs say thats not fair and they give you the Earned Income Tax Credit. That way it's all fair and you can get your refund.
Now if they can sell the "poor" on the EITC how hard would it be sell them on soaking the "rich" with inputed income taxes?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/gerald_warner/blog/2008/09/19/joe_biden_loses_barack_obama_the_catholic_vote
Joe Biden loses Barack Obama the Catholic vote
Posted By: Gerald Warner at Sep 19, 2008 at 07:34:17 [General]
Posted in: Society
Tags:
Archbishop Burke , Archbishop Chaput , Joe Biden , Nancy Pelosi
More, as promised, on Senator Joe Biden (why should Sarah Palin get all the coverage?). Remember, you read it here first: on September 11 this blog reported a mounting backlash from Catholic bishops against Biden, Barack Obama's "Catholic" pro-abortion running mate. At that time I estimated eight bishops had come out to denounce Biden; the total is now 55. Beyond that, Biden is being trashed across every state of the Union by Catholic newspapers, TV and radio stations, and blogs. It is a tsunami of rejection.
The story has now hit the secular media. Last Saturday Time magazine asked: "Does Biden Have a Catholic Problem?" By Wednesday the issue had moved onto the front page of the New York Times. Joe the Jinx has blown it, big time. Biden has only himself to blame: he started this war, with his notoriously undisciplined mouth. He knew the dangers. Last August, Archbishop Raymond Burke, former Archbishop of St Louis and now Prefect of the Apostolic Segnatura in Rome, said communion should be denied to pro-abortion politicians "until they have reformed their lives".
Archbishop Chaput of Denver had already announced Biden should not receive communion because of his pro-abortion views. Defiantly, Biden took communion in his home parish in Delaware in late August. On September 2 the Bishop of Scranton, Pennsylvania (a crucial swing state) banned him from communion in his diocese. That is effective excommunication. Then came the crucial provocation. On NBC's Meet the Press programme on September 7 Biden grossly misrepresented the Catholic Church's teaching on abortion and audaciously cited St Thomas Aquinas in his own cause.
That did it. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had already done the same thing on the same programme, in her instance citing St Augustine. Even the torpid US bishops could not have false doctrine glibly broadcast by public figures, misleading their flock. So the counterattack described here last week began, culminating in a statement from the US Bishops' Conference. The bishops of Kansas City have also issued a pastoral letter on the subject. It is open season on Biden.
There are 47 million Catholic voters in the United States. One quarter of all registered voters are Catholics. At every presidential election in the past 30 years the Catholic vote has gone to the winning candidate, except for Al Gore in 2000. This year 41 per cent of Catholics are independents - up from 30 per cent in 2004. Psephologists claim practising Catholics were the decisive factor in the crucial swing states in 2004: in Ohio 65 per cent of Catholics voted for Bush, in Florida 66 per cent. They were drifting away in disillusionment from the Republicans and split 50-50, until Joe Biden worked his magic. This is electoral suicide by the Democrats.
I will never understand why Senator Obama picked such a verbally undisciplined running mate.
Any Catholic considering voting for Obama needs to carefully consider his voting record on abortion, the chruch's well-publicized stance on the issue, and then decide if they're going fixed menu or a la carte with the doctrine of their faith.
http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race
Poll: Racial views steer some white Dems away from Obama
By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP) — Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent," responsible for their own troubles.
The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 — about two and one-half percentage points.
Certainly, Republican John McCain has his own obstacles: He's an ally of an unpopular president and would be the nation's oldest first-term president. But Obama faces this: 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents.
Adjectives that describe blacks
More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views.
Such numbers are a harsh dose of reality in a campaign for the history books. Obama, the first black candidate with a serious shot at the presidency, accepted the Democratic nomination on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, a seminal moment for a nation that enshrined slavery in its Constitution.
"There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean there's only a few bigots," said Stanford political scientist Paul Sniderman who helped analyze the exhaustive survey.
The pollsters set out to determine why Obama is locked in a close race with McCain even as the political landscape seems to favor Democrats. President Bush's unpopularity, the Iraq war and a national sense of economic hard times cut against GOP candidates, as does that fact that Democratic voters outnumber Republicans.
The findings suggest that Obama's problem is close to home — among his fellow Democrats, particularly non-Hispanic white voters. Just seven in 10 people who call themselves Democrats support Obama, compared to the 85 percent of self-identified Republicans who back McCain.
The survey also focused on the racial attitudes of independent voters because they are likely to decide the election.
Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown.
Not all whites are prejudiced. Indeed, more whites say good things about blacks than say bad things, the poll shows. And many whites who see blacks in a negative light are still willing or even eager to vote for Obama.
On the other side of the racial question, the Illinois Democrat is drawing almost unanimous support from blacks, the poll shows, though that probably wouldn't be enough to counter the negative effect of some whites' views.
Race is not the biggest factor driving Democrats and independents away from Obama. Doubts about his competency loom even larger, the poll indicates. More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that.
Three in 10 of those Democrats who don't trust Obama's change-making credentials say they plan to vote for McCain.
Still, the effects of whites' racial views are apparent in the polling.
Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama's support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.
But in an election without precedent, it's hard to know if such models take into account all the possible factors at play.
The AP-Yahoo News poll used the unique methodology of Knowledge Networks, a Menlo Park, Calif., firm that interviews people online after randomly selecting and screening them over telephone. Numerous studies have shown that people are more likely to report embarrassing behavior and unpopular opinions when answering questions on a computer rather than talking to a stranger.
Other techniques used in the poll included recording people's responses to black or white faces flashed on a computer screen, asking participants to rate how well certain adjectives apply to blacks, measuring whether people believe blacks' troubles are their own fault, and simply asking people how much they like or dislike blacks.
"We still don't like black people," said John Clouse, 57, reflecting the sentiments of his pals gathered at a coffee shop in Somerset, Ohio.
Given a choice of several positive and negative adjectives that might describe blacks, 20 percent of all whites said the word "violent" strongly applied. Among other words, 22 percent agreed with "boastful," 29 percent "complaining," 13 percent "lazy" and 11 percent "irresponsible." When asked about positive adjectives, whites were more likely to stay on the fence than give a strongly positive assessment.
Among white Democrats, one third cited a negative adjective and, of those, 58 percent said they planned to back Obama.
The poll sought to measure latent prejudices among whites by asking about factors contributing to the state of black America. One finding: More than a quarter of white Democrats agree that "if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites."
Those who agreed with that statement were much less likely to back Obama than those who didn't.
Among white independents, racial stereotyping is not uncommon. For example, while about 20 percent of independent voters called blacks "intelligent" or "smart," more than one third latched on the adjective "complaining" and 24 percent said blacks were "violent."
Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they "try harder."
The survey broke ground by incorporating images of black and white faces to measure implicit racial attitudes, or prejudices that are so deeply rooted that people may not realize they have them. That test suggested the incidence of racial prejudice is even higher, with more than half of whites revealing more negative feelings toward blacks than whites.
Researchers used mathematical modeling to sort out the relative impact of a huge swath of variables that might have an impact on people's votes — including race, ideology, party identification, the hunger for change and the sentiments of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's backers.
Just 59 percent of her white Democratic supporters said they wanted Obama to be president. Nearly 17 percent of Clinton's white backers plan to vote for McCain.
Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well, a finding that suggests many of her supporters in the primaries — particularly whites with high school education or less — were motivated in part by racial attitudes.
The survey of 2,227 adults was conducted Aug. 27 to Sept. 5. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.
———
Associated Press writers Nancy Benac, Julie Carr Smyth, Philip Elliot, Julie Pace and Sonya Ross contributed to this story.
———
On the Net:
Polling site: http://news.yahoo.com/polls
If one were to go to the URL for this story, one will find a link to the full poll results in PDF format.
In my view, the article's emphasis on whites' views of blacks detracts from an understanding of how views on race may impact voter behavior.
The responses to the poll's final question (which the article does not mention at all) indicate that the fact that Senator Obama would be the first African American president will not affect the vote of 84% of whites compared to 82% of all respondents.
The Reaper
09-22-2008, 12:27
That study would carry more weight if it presented the reverse-what black people thought about whites (certain to be a lot of negativity there as well), and how many were supporting Obama primarily because of race.
Otherwise, it looks like a self-hating piece to me.
TR
The Reaper
09-22-2008, 14:56
Great Victor Davis Hanson piece.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/palin_and_obamawhat_really_is.html
TR